Case 3328392/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr EH Thiam Seck v Carillion plc (In Compulsory Liquidation) — 2019
- Case reference
- 3328392/2017
- Decision date
- 23 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr EH Thiam Seck
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr EH Thiam Seck's claim against Carillion PLC. It held that the respondent company was in compulsory liquidation and that the permission of the court had not been obtained for the proceedings to be instituted or continued, as required by the Insolvency Act 1986.
The tribunal also recorded that, on 7 August 2019, it gave the claimant 14 days to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason. On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claim should be struck out.
No merits findings or monetary award were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim because the respondent was in compulsory liquidation and permission of the court had not been obtained under the Insolvency Act 1986. It also noted that, after giving the claimant an opportunity on 7 August 2019 to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for lack of active pursuit, the claimant failed to give an acceptable reason. | Struck out | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.